American politics

The GOP race

Still Mitt by a mile

I HESITATE to challenge all those pundits who have returned to their drawing boards in shock after Rick Santorum's trifecta in Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado. His victories, and Mitt Romney's poor showing, were undoubtedly impressive. Even Nate Silver, the horse race's supreme quant, now argues in the New York Times that all expectations have been upended and the race could now drag on for a long time.

That so? I'm underwhelmed. As Mr Silver himself acknowledges, Mr Romney made the mistake of over-confidence after his victories in Florida and Nevada and kept his powder dry this week. Meanwhile, these results saw the continuing decline of Newt Gingrich. (I'm enjoying watching him gradually disappear, like the smile on the Cheshire Cat.) As for Mr Santorum, he benefits both from last-non-Romney-standing syndrome (Ron Paul is in a different sort of game) and an engaging genuineness.

The trouble with Mr Santorum being engagingly genuine is that he is genuine about a range of intolerant social beliefs that almost certainly make him unelectable. Nor can either he or Mr Gingrich deploy the scale of resources that are needed for Super-Tuesday on March 6th, when 11 states vote at once. It is true that this has been a bad week for Mr Romney. The results are a reminder of his lack of popularity with the conservative base. But the things that make him unpopular with the conservative base are the very things that make him the most electable challenger to Barack Obama -- and the Republican Party knows it. To my mind, he still has the nomination in the bag.

All the trifecta in Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado did yesterday was to convince more moderate Republicans and Independents that the people who vote in the GOP primaries are so far out of touch with reality that the party is simply too scary to vote for.

This is the same phenomenon that overtook the British Labour Party in the period between Wilson and Blair, where the inmates were allowed to run the asylum, and it terrified the voting public.

Well, the GOP has the inmates-running-the-asylum problem right now, and even if Gov. Romney eventually prevails, the voters generally have had their fill of both the asylum and the inmates.

The problem I have with Romney is that, even if he doesn't have genuinely intolerant beliefs, he's going to be forced to parrot the social conservatives' views if he wants to win their votes. I don't know about you, but I don't want to see the President of the United States granting an air of legitimacy to the sort of garbage that comes from the mind of Rush Limbaugh.

You are probably correct that the nomination is still Romney's to loose. I think he may manage to do so, but odds are he gets it.

Unfortunately for him, the nomination process looks to be lasting far longer than he might have wished. Which means that Romney will have to not only keep pandering but pandering harder. The more extreme he feels compelled to talk, the worse his prospects in the general election. And the closer to the general election he has to talk the talk of the extremes, the more likely that the voters he needs in the general election will hear and remember -- which likewise is bad for his chances in the general election.

In short, Santorum, like Gingrich and the others, can't keep Romney from the nomination. But he can, and likely will, make it impossible for him to win office.

And, when he does not, look for the Republicans to decide, once more, that the solution is to run a "more pure" conservative next time. Which will be fatal, but don't expect them to accept that. The real question is, will they lose badly enough in 2016 to figure out that they need to move back towards the center. No matter how badly they lose, my bet is that they will act like the Republicans in California have: refuse to let reality intrude, no matter the cost.

I think Santorum as a political possibility has been underestimated for a long time. First, it is in Newt's nature to self destruct. Then we have a two-way race and Romney, who, for all the talk of inevitability, is a terribly weak candidate for a republican primary. He just can't communicate, or channel the least bit of pathos. Never in my life have I seen someone so incapable at responding to attacks - it's as if he has almost a preternatural inability to throw someone's insult back in their face.

And then you've got Santorum, whose blue collar populism strikes a chord. The republican electorate doesn't read the economist- it watches Fox or listens to Rush. A control economy is less of a left/right issue than people think. Deep down, everybody really just wants someone to come along and fix all their problems for them.

And I wouldn't discount him for his distasteful obligatory take on Christianity. There's a name for the system of government where denigrating a small minority group in order to let the rest feel superior is rewarded - it's called democracy.

To come to the last of the four remaining candidates, remember that there's a so-called libertarian running, picking up a good deal of support, and sucking all the oxygen out of the "not-Santorum-in-a-million-****ing-years" side of the republican party.

And to respond to anyone who thinks that tripping up Mitt Romney ahead of the general election is a good thing, remember there's always the a great deal of uncertainty around any election. What if the EU goes down the drain, what if Obama has had an affair, what if Obama has to bail out a bank? What if, what if, what if.

I worry about Santorum as the GOP nominee first because he'll loose to Obama; and second, because he might actually win.

Mitt Romney as a person and as a candidate is everything the American people want in a President. The sad thing is, nobody wants to admit it. Mitt Romney is the most qualified candidate to seek the Presidency in my lifetime and I have been around since Truman. Americans seem to be impressed with style and not substance. Style got us Obama.

Mitt’s vision and its fruition for the nation can be observed in the organization and sponsorship of the Winter Olympics in Utah. Mitt’s efforts were extremely successful in providing that great venue for the world to see. Now he appears in the midst of major economic issues, the creation of jobs representing a major hurdle. Mitt can create the jobs and expand the pool of working citizens.

With Congress hopelessly divided and perhaps as many as 24 million people out of work we need the very best visionary and business practitioner that we can find, namely Mitt Romney. This man is a team player not a compromiser. He will inspire and unite the Congress and the American people.

Now, Rick Santorum, pretending to be a conservative, has done well in three state’s dog and pony shows. Never mind he could not be re-elected to the Senate from Pennsylvania. He is according to Ron Paul and others not what he appears. Yet, these minimal results and his Super Pac supporter, do not change a thing. By far Mitt Romney is the best Republican candidate. Rick is simply a side bar and distraction.

This is a preview of the general election. Just as Santorum enjoys not-Romney status, Romney will enjoy not-Obama status. But in both cases, the 'not-him' candidate cannot win unless the principal implodes.

Rio Peter's response seems perfectly fair to me, but I wouldn't call it reductio ad absurdum as the original statement - "I do not consider Santorum's opinions intolerant, as he disapproves of practices not people." - was clearly absurd in the first place.

Sorry, did I miss something? Exactly how is Mitt Romney the most qualified candidate in your lifetime? Even admitting that you were born yesterday (I'm assuming that you are referring to "Truman", the wonderful film starting Jim Carrey), that is quite a statement. Get real: Mitt is an incredibly ambitious politician whom virtually nobody trusts nor has a clue as to what he stands for. The Republican right can't stomach him. Nor will the American center or left. Only those who detest Obama will hold their noses and vote for him. Given Obama's failings and the fact that a large number of Americans would never vote for someone of, how shall I put this, Obama's "ilk", that limits Mitt's votes to 49.9 %. If his brother were Governor of Florida, I reckon he would be in with a chance!
I will grant you that Mitty has been quite successful at profitably running the corporate equivalent of junk yard into the ground. A corporate chop shop! America's future, surely! And I wish that I had 25 million in my IRA. But have you ever heard Mitt try and connect with the man in the street? He will ensure Obama's reelection. As would any of the Republican candidates would. Let's face it, Republican phonies and reactionaries are only viable candidates, marginally, thanks to their kindred souls in the Democratic party.

You're probably a real smart guy who thinks inside the box. Who can beat Obama is the question and appeal to the independents. What is it about you strong Conservatives that can't do simple math. There are enough black votes alone to outnumber the Conservative masses. You will lose without the independents and you still don't understand. Go Mitt....

I think one vital fact is being overlooked in this post: Romney lost states in a big way which he won in the 2008 primary. Secondly, Romney's sole asset is the perception of his inevitability: this has taken a severe knock. Now people are looking at Romney, and not unreasonably concluding that he is a Marxist of the Groucho variety: